Hi Emily; Very nice fiend, particularly at that price. There are different opinions on a substitute needle for the #8. Personally I use?a DBx1 in mine. The original needle is a 6N1 or 126x1. These have a 1.75mm round shank & a length from top of the shank to top of the eye of 38.9mm? ?The DBx1 has a 1.64mm round shank but is only 33.9mm to the eye. It thus has to be pulled down in the clamp by 5mm, around 3/16" as well as having the eye aligned. As the needle clamps from the front in the #8, there is not needle with?a flat for self setting.? Another needle worth considering is the 128x1. This needle has a 1.75mm shank but?is the same length as the DBx1. The DBx1 needle is generally lower priced for the same quality needle so I use it. The slightly smaller shank presents no problem.?
One thing I like about the #8 treadle is the two-speed drive option.? For some things I like the lower speed option & for other the faster.
Miller/TN
|
Hi!
I will be uploading pictures to Flickr soon but I just got a Wheeler &Wilson no. 8 that is dated 1880. I got it for 20 dollars, it's in good condition with table, 3 bobbins and attachments. What are some substitutes for the needles? I've seen varying opinions. Super excited about this! When I lived in Oregon I had a head but never used it and it was one of the machines I regretted selling.?
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
sgheeter via groups.io wrote:
> I am sure my photos did not help...? Should I remove, resize and repost them?
I'd hate to ask everyone to do that. It's really Miller's call what
to do, I think. There's no question we could raise the money quickly --
we did it on the W&G list in about a day. And perhaps by the time
next year comes around the groups.io folks will have made resizing
easier, and we'll be able to fit back into our old space.
On the other hand, with the new size limit on uploads, we wouldn't
have to download/re-upload very many to keep us going for quite a
while, since every large image we resize would make room for several
smaller ones.
paul
p.s. I did look at your album the other day -- they're a mix of very small
and very big. :-)
>
> Also very willing to send funds to help site expand!
>
> Steve
>
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 42.6 degrees)
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
I am sure my photos did not help...? Should I remove, resize and repost them?
Also very willing to send funds to help site expand!
Steve
|
Thank you for that little history lesson, Miller! I really appreciate it. It answered a lot of questions and brought up some new ones! I'm guessing mine is a later 9W7 (flat bobbin) based on my serial number, but the few quick snaps I took of it were not that detailed. I'll definitely open it back up and check for which bobbin it takes.
Thanks again, and FWIW, I'll happily chip a little in if you all decide to take up a collection for more storage space.??
Cheers!
Stephanie S
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
I own this site and intend to maintain it:
It USED to be about the character I portrayed at renaissance fairs.
Since I no longer do that, I could add sections/directories for each
type of machine/group and host the pictures there. One would have to
post a link to the picture to have others see it, and I could add
particular ftp id's to particular directories so owners of the
groups could deposit pictures there.
Just another idea,
RileyG/OK
On 11/6/2019 9:07 PM, Miller Fulks
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hi Paul;
We currently have 380 members. Obviously all are not real
active, for if each posted once a week we would have about
54 posts a day. To raise the $220.00 needed for an upgrade
would only require about 60? per member. I have no idea how
many would kick in, I don't want to run anyone?off over it.?
Over the next week or so I will look into the process of
redoing the current photo files. I will start with mine, I
don't recall how much space I used on my photos & then
may look at Dean's next. This Monday, Nov 11, I start a new
round of Chemo. I'm probably not going to be able to do much
else but if I can sit at my computer for an hour or so a day
I could go through a lot of them. If I am not badly mistaken
even though I re-post them, they can still be credited?to
their original poster.
Miller/TN
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:27 PM
paul fox < pgf@...>
wrote:
I've
changed the Subject on this thread to better reflect what
we're
talking about.
Summary:
? ? - We've exhausted our storage space on .? We're allowed
? ? ? ? 1GB (without paying for more), and we've used over
1.3GB.
? ? ? ? (They clearly have a very generous "slop" factor.)
? ? - There's a way to limit the size of uploaded photos, and
Miller
? ? ? ? has now turned this on (uploads are now reduced to a
max of
? ? ? ? 1024x1024), but it only affects photos as they're
uploaded.
? ? ? ? There's no way to resize a photo that's already on the
site.
? ? ? ? (The forum author has a "todo" item in their bug
tracking
? ? ? ? system to fix this lack.)
? ? - The only way to resize photos is to download them,
re-upload
? ? ? ? them, and then delete the original.? The site
moderators/owners
? ? ? ? (i.e., Miller, Helen, and I) have the ability do this
for any
? ? ? ? photo, but the original ownership of the photo will be
lost,
? ? ? ? as well as the original upload date.? Regardless, I'm
sure I
? ? ? ? speak for all three of us in saying that we don't
really have
? ? ? ? time to or energy to do that for all of the photos.
As one example of probably many hundreds, this photo of a
bobbin and
holder, uploaded by Dean, currently takes 3.5MB:
? ? /g/Wheeler_and_Wilson-Sewing-Machines/photo/273/0?p=Created,,,20,2,0,0
If I download it, and then resize it to a maximum of
1024x1024, it takes
about a tenth of that space, just 0.36MB bytes.
We could just start paying for more storage ($220/year would
buy us 10G
of storage), and if we "took up a collection" we could
probably raise
the money fairly quickly -- the group has 380 members.? But
we'd have
to raise the money again next year, and the year after...? so
let's not
go there yet.
I'll experiment with downloading/re-uploading some photos,
just to see
how much of a pain it is.? I'll report back.
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@...
(arlington, ma, where it's 45.9 degrees)
--
Miller
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
If there is a Paypal address I will contribute 5 dollars.? I have made similar offer to the Kenmore group that migrated to io as well as an offer to ElnaHeirlooms group but nobody asked as of yet for donations.? Victorian Sweatshop is not in need and my main group now but I truly like the Kenmore group and like to keep up on the Wheeler and Wilson as we are slowly getting our machines here a little at a time from the cue.? We will eventually have four no 7, one no 12, three no 8 (two hand crank) and one D9 of which only some are here now so we have vested interest in W&W.
Best regards, Mike
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 7, 2019, at 06:49, Cheryl <jncparker4@...> wrote:
?I'll be happy to kick in some towards the fee.
Cheryl in Illinois
--
http://cherylsteapots2quilting.blogspot.com/
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
I'll be happy to kick in some towards the fee.
Cheryl in Illinois
--
http://cherylsteapots2quilting.blogspot.com/
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
miller wrote:
> Over the next week or so I will look into the process of redoing the
> current photo files. I will start with mine, I don't recall how much space
> I used on my photos & then may look at Dean's next. This Monday, Nov 11, I
> start a new round of Chemo. I'm probably not going to be able to do much
> else but if I can sit at my computer for an hour or so a day I could go
> through a lot of them. If I am not badly mistaken even though I re-post
> them, they can still be credited to their original poster.
I played with doing download/upload on a couple of pictures of Dean's
yesterday. It requires several steps, but it's not hard. I'll write
it up, to save time for you or anyone else who wants to resize their
photos. Even if we only do a dozen or two, it might make enough room
for folks to do the occasional upload (like Jon's pdf file).
I would suggest not going through this process for photos of documents
(trade cards, manuals, etc), since they may become less legible.
It will be easiest if you clear out your Downloads folder before
starting, to make it easier to keep track of the filesnames you're
downloading. (Or, configure your browser to temporarily use a
different folder for downloads.) Fewer filenames to look at means
less possibility of confusion, at least for me.
1) Open the picture you want to "process". Check the image size --
if it's less than 200kB, it's likely not worth doing.
2) Click "Download". I tried it on both Chrome and Firefox: unless
I'm doing it wrong, this doesn't really do the download -- it
just takes you to a page containing nothing but the image,
where you can then right-click to use "Save image as...".
3) After downloading, use your browser's "back" button to return
to the photo, and use the Edit button to access the red "Delete"
button (near the bottom).
4) You'll now be back at the album page. Click "Add photo", and
re-upload the image.
5) If necessary, use the Edit button again, to change the name of
the owner of the photo from yourself back to the true owner.
(Tip: the possible owners are in a very long drop-down list.
Just start typing the name you want to get to it quickly.)
You can delay step 3 (deleting the photo after downloading) until
after you've re-uploaded it if you prefer. You'll end up with two
copies of the photo on the site, one of which is the original, and the
other the newly resized version. They will have the same name, and
will look identical, so you need to look at the image size to be sure
you delete the right one.
You can also do all of the downloads (and optionally, the deletes), and
then upload all of the downloaded photos at once by multi-selecting
them before uploading. I'm not sure that saves much work, though.
And best of luck with the chemo!
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 39.0 degrees)
|
Re: group storage limit has been reached
Hi Paul; We currently have 380 members. Obviously all are not real active, for if each posted once a week we would have about 54 posts a day. To raise the $220.00 needed for an upgrade would only require about 60? per member. I have no idea how many would kick in, I don't want to run anyone?off over it.?
Over the next week or so I will look into the process of redoing the current photo files. I will start with mine, I don't recall how much space I used on my photos & then may look at Dean's next. This Monday, Nov 11, I start a new round of Chemo. I'm probably not going to be able to do much else but if I can sit at my computer for an hour or so a day I could go through a lot of them. If I am not badly mistaken even though I re-post them, they can still be credited?to their original poster.
Miller/TN
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:27 PM paul fox < pgf@...> wrote: I've changed the Subject on this thread to better reflect what we're
talking about.
Summary:
? ? - We've exhausted our storage space on .? We're allowed
? ? ? ? 1GB (without paying for more), and we've used over 1.3GB.
? ? ? ? (They clearly have a very generous "slop" factor.)
? ? - There's a way to limit the size of uploaded photos, and Miller
? ? ? ? has now turned this on (uploads are now reduced to a max of
? ? ? ? 1024x1024), but it only affects photos as they're uploaded.
? ? ? ? There's no way to resize a photo that's already on the site.
? ? ? ? (The forum author has a "todo" item in their bug tracking
? ? ? ? system to fix this lack.)
? ? - The only way to resize photos is to download them, re-upload
? ? ? ? them, and then delete the original.? The site moderators/owners
? ? ? ? (i.e., Miller, Helen, and I) have the ability do this for any
? ? ? ? photo, but the original ownership of the photo will be lost,
? ? ? ? as well as the original upload date.? Regardless, I'm sure I
? ? ? ? speak for all three of us in saying that we don't really have
? ? ? ? time to or energy to do that for all of the photos.
As one example of probably many hundreds, this photo of a bobbin and
holder, uploaded by Dean, currently takes 3.5MB:
? ? /g/Wheeler_and_Wilson-Sewing-Machines/photo/273/0?p=Created,,,20,2,0,0
If I download it, and then resize it to a maximum of 1024x1024, it takes
about a tenth of that space, just 0.36MB bytes.
We could just start paying for more storage ($220/year would buy us 10G
of storage), and if we "took up a collection" we could probably raise
the money fairly quickly -- the group has 380 members.? But we'd have
to raise the money again next year, and the year after...? so let's not
go there yet.
I'll experiment with downloading/re-uploading some photos, just to see
how much of a pain it is.? I'll report back.
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 45.9 degrees)
|
group storage limit has been reached
I've changed the Subject on this thread to better reflect what we're talking about. Summary: - We've exhausted our storage space on groups.io. We're allowed 1GB (without paying for more), and we've used over 1.3GB. (They clearly have a very generous "slop" factor.) - There's a way to limit the size of uploaded photos, and Miller has now turned this on (uploads are now reduced to a max of 1024x1024), but it only affects photos as they're uploaded. There's no way to resize a photo that's already on the site. (The forum author has a "todo" item in their bug tracking system to fix this lack.) - The only way to resize photos is to download them, re-upload them, and then delete the original. The site moderators/owners (i.e., Miller, Helen, and I) have the ability do this for any photo, but the original ownership of the photo will be lost, as well as the original upload date. Regardless, I'm sure I speak for all three of us in saying that we don't really have time to or energy to do that for all of the photos. As one example of probably many hundreds, this photo of a bobbin and holder, uploaded by Dean, currently takes 3.5MB: /g/Wheeler_and_Wilson-Sewing-Machines/photo/273/0?p=Created,,,20,2,0,0 If I download it, and then resize it to a maximum of 1024x1024, it takes about a tenth of that space, just 0.36MB bytes. We could just start paying for more storage ($220/year would buy us 10G of storage), and if we "took up a collection" we could probably raise the money fairly quickly -- the group has 380 members. But we'd have to raise the money again next year, and the year after... so let's not go there yet. I'll experiment with downloading/re-uploading some photos, just to see how much of a pain it is. I'll report back. paul =---------------------- paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 45.9 degrees)
|
miller wrote:
> Hi Paul;
> My problem is I do not have a lot of computer savvy. I did go under
> administrator & make that change to the photo size, do you know if this
> will be retroactive or not.
Thanks for doing that. It won't be retroactive. This morning I
joined the groups.io maintainers forum to try and find out more -- I
should know more soon.
> When Dean & I set up this group we did so with the understanding I would
> deal primarily with the machine questions & he would handle the computer
> end. After he "Disappeared" it became obvious that I could not handle it
> alone so You & Helen were added as co-owners.
>
> I truly appreciate the help the two of you have given to the group. If
> either of you sees anything which you feel needs fixing please do bring it
> up, or if it's something which needs to be done, desperately, go ahead &
> Fix it.
Okey Doke!
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 44.4 degrees)
|
Hi Paul; My problem is I do not have a lot of computer savvy. I did go under administrator?& make that change to the photo size, do you know if this will be retroactive or not.? When Dean & I set up this group we did so with the understanding I would deal primarily with the machine questions & he would handle the computer end. After he "Disappeared" it became obvious that I could not handle it alone so You & Helen were added as co-owners.?
I truly appreciate the help the two of you have given to the group.? If either of you sees anything which you feel needs fixing please do bring it up, or if it's something which needs to be done, desperately,?go ahead & Fix it.
Miller/TN
|
I had another thought about storage: we currently allow photos of any
size to be uploaded. The groups.io software will do on-the-fly
resizing of uploads to any size we wish. I propose that we change the
current "unlimited" setting to something more reasonable for web
usage, like 1024x1024. That will keep future uploads from being so
large, but we'll then have to find out if that resizing can be done
after the fact to our existing collection. I'm happy to research
this. Of course, I have no idea how much space this might save -- the
tools groups.io gives for managing online storage aren't all that
detailed, and we need to save 330MB of space. But it would be a start.
Thoughts? (Especally from Miller, please. :-)
paul
I wrote:
> miller wrote:
> > Hi Jon;
> >
> > I am not sure but I suspect we may be out of space in the files section. It
> > is stated we are using 57MB of space. I tried to find a statement as to how
> > much we are allowed but was unsuccessful. I could open the New Folder tab
> > but the Upload File was blocked, thus my assumption we are out of space. I
> > have never had a problem uploading a file previously.
>
> Miller is likely right -- it's because we're out of storage.
>
> Miller -- if you click the "Upgrade" (with the big plus sign) under
> the Admin section, you'll see:
>
> Plan: Free
> Using 1.4 GB total storage out of 1GB
> Attachments: 0 B - 0% of 1GB [View Attachments]
> Photos: 1.3 GB - 133% of 1GB
> Files: 57 MB - 5% of 1GB
>
> So we're quite a bit over the total limit, though a very small fraction
> of that is files -- it's mostly photos.
>
> We could upgrade the group to "Premium", and bump our storage limit to
> 10Gb, but that would start costing us $220/year.
>
> I'm not sure how we'd go about culling photos to get below the limit. I
> suspect members of the group might contribute to help with the $220, but
> we should remember that it's an annual thing.
>
> paul
>
> =----------------------
> paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 48.2 degrees)
>
>
>
>
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 37.9 degrees)
|
Miller,
Ah-ha.? I had forgotten about the data limit for the manual.
Jon
|
Hi & Welcome Stephanie;
The Singer 9W is a great machine, based on the W&W D-9. From 1905 until around 1909 the 9W1 still had W&W decals & fit W&W cabinets & cases. Around 1909 the 9W7 was begun with Singer decals & the bed modified to fit Singer cabinets. Sounds as if you have a 9W7. This machine was discontinued around 1913 & was replaced?by the?Singer 115, which?was first introduced in 1912.? Early 9W7 machines retained the bagel bobbin of the W&W D-9 & the 9W1 but a flat-sided bobbin was used on later ones If yours has the flat-sided bobbin you can use the bobbins for a Singer 221 (Featherweight) or 301 as a replacement. They still use the W&W 127x1 needle which is getting harder to find but show up along.
Miller/TN?
Hello All!
My husband and I bought an old Singer treadle table about 15 years ago, promptly took the "pretty but non-motorized" machine head out and put an Singer 66 in it (putting the treadle head in the 66's box to keep it safe). We're in N. California, and after the recent antics of our gas & electric provider, began thinking about that old treadle head and decided it might be nice (and prudent) to get the old girl hooked backed up! The serial number initially threw us off, but we finally discovered that she's a Singer 9w7. She seems to be in pretty decent shape, considering her age. We're planning on spending some time cleaning her up (and the table too) after the holidays. She's really lovely and deserves to be put back in action.
Really glad to have found this group! We're looking forward to learning more about her and getting her working again!
Cheers!
Stephanie
|
Hello All!
My husband and I bought an old Singer treadle table about 15 years ago, promptly took the "pretty but non-motorized" machine head out and put an Singer 66 in it (putting the treadle head in the 66's box to keep it safe). We're in N. California, and after the recent antics of our gas & electric provider, began thinking about that old treadle head and decided it might be nice (and prudent) to get the old girl hooked backed up! The serial number initially threw us off, but we finally discovered that she's a Singer 9w7. She seems to be in pretty decent shape, considering her age. We're planning on spending some time cleaning her up (and the table too) after the holidays. She's really lovely and deserves to be put back in action.
Really glad to have found this group! We're looking forward to learning more about her and getting her working again!
Cheers!
Stephanie
|
Miller,
I have sent you two emails without response. Would you please tell me if you received them? I am the one who sent you the link to Rijnko Fekkes if you don¡¯t remember me.
Mary (9W7) ?Orange County California
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 5, 2019, at 7:06 AM, Miller Fulks < miller@...> wrote: Hi Jon;
I am not sure but I suspect we may be out of space in the files section. It is stated we are using 57MB of space. I tried to find a statement as to how much we are allowed but was unsuccessful. I could open the New Folder tab but the Upload File was blocked, thus my assumption we are out of space. I have never had a problem uploading a file previously.
Miller/TN
|
miller wrote:
> Hi Jon;
>
> I am not sure but I suspect we may be out of space in the files section. It
> is stated we are using 57MB of space. I tried to find a statement as to how
> much we are allowed but was unsuccessful. I could open the New Folder tab
> but the Upload File was blocked, thus my assumption we are out of space. I
> have never had a problem uploading a file previously.
Miller is likely right -- it's because we're out of storage.
Miller -- if you click the "Upgrade" (with the big plus sign) under
the Admin section, you'll see:
Plan: Free
Using 1.4 GB total storage out of 1GB
Attachments: 0 B - 0% of 1GB [View Attachments]
Photos: 1.3 GB - 133% of 1GB
Files: 57 MB - 5% of 1GB
So we're quite a bit over the total limit, though a very small fraction
of that is files -- it's mostly photos.
We could upgrade the group to "Premium", and bump our storage limit to
10Gb, but that would start costing us $220/year.
I'm not sure how we'd go about culling photos to get below the limit. I
suspect members of the group might contribute to help with the $220, but
we should remember that it's an annual thing.
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, pgf@... (arlington, ma, where it's 48.2 degrees)
|
Stephanie S
RileyG
Ken Jansen
Cheryl